[簡玉琴碩士論文電子全文下載：請以關鍵字 簡玉琴 ，選擇研究生進行查詢]
論文名稱: 桃園縣國民小學教師自我效能與教學效能關係之研究
論文名稱: A Study on the Relationship between Teacher Efficacy
and Teaching Effectiveness for the Elementary School Teachers
研究生: 簡玉琴 Chien, Yu-Chin
指導教授: 陳木金 Chen, Mu-Jin
學位類別: 碩士
校院名稱: 國立台北師範學院
系所名稱: 國民教育研究所
學號: 8949008
學年度: 90
語文別: 中文
論文頁數: 179
關鍵字: 教師自我效能 Teacher Efficacy
教師教學效能 Teacher Teaching Effectiveness
[論文摘要]
本研究旨在探討國民小學教師自我效能與教學效能之關係，並比較不同背景變項的國小教
師在教師自我效能、教師教學效能上的差異情形，進而分析教師自我效能各因素對教師教
學效能的預測力。
本研究以文獻分析法及問卷調查法為主。研究對象以分層隨機抽樣，抽取桃園縣50所公立
國民小學教師500人，其中有效樣本443人，可用率為88.6%。以「國民小學教師自我效能與
教學效能調查問卷」為研究工具，進行問卷調查研究。調查所得資料以SPSS 8.0 For
Windows 電腦統計套裝軟體進行描述統計分析、積差相關分析、單因子變異數分析、多變
量變異數分析、多元強迫迴歸分析等統計方法處理。
歸納實證研究的發現，本研究獲致以下結論：
一、國民小學整體教師自我效能在中上程度，其中以「個人教學自我效 能」向度的得分
最高。
二、國民小學整體教師教學效能在中上程度，其中以「教學評量」向度的得分最高。
三、國民小學教師自我效能與教學效能間呈顯著的正相關（r=.72）。
四、低、中、高三組不同教師自我效能的教師在教師教學效能上具有顯著差異；且高分組
教師自我效能的教師之得分均顯著優於中、低分組。
五、不同背景變項中，僅最高學歷、任教年資在教師自我效能上達顯著差異。
六、不同背景變項中，僅任教年資在教師教學效能上達顯著差異。
七、教師自我效能各因素對整體教師教學效能之聯合預測力達60.9%，其中「個人教學自我
效能」向度之預測力達59.7%。
根據上述研究結論，本研究提出下列建議：
一、對教育行政機關的建議：
增闢國小教師在職進修之管道，鼓勵教師參加教育專業認證
二、對師資培育機構的建議：
培養學生主動學習的精神，鼓勵學生積極參與教育研習活動
三、對國民小學教師的建議：
主動參與學校教師研究小組，分享教學經驗提昇整教學品質
四、對未來相關研究的建議：
（一）在研究架構方面，可採多向度教師自我效能概念加以分析；
（二）在研究對象方面，可增加私立小學及其他縣市小學之樣本；
（三）在研究方法方面，可在問卷施測前先到教育現場進行訪談。
[摘要]
A Study on the Relationship between Teacher Efficacy and Teaching Effectiveness
for the Elementary School Teachers
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between
teacher efficacy and teaching effectiveness for the elementary school
teachers .
The investigation were based on literary analysis and questionnaire
survey. Through stratified random sampling, the subjects including 500
teachers from 50 public elementary schools in Taoyuan County, were selected.
Questionnaire were administered to the selected subjects among returned
questionnaires, 443 were valid, with a 88.6% valid percentage. The data
obtained by questionnaire was analyzed by descriptive statistics, Pearson
correlation analysis, one-way ANOVA, MANOVA and multiple enter regression, at
α=.05 significant level.
The study conclusions are as follows: (1) “Teacher Efficacy” rated high
middle level. Among the sectional scores, “personal teaching efficacy” is
the highest; (2) “Teacher Teaching Effectiveness” rated high middle level.
Among the sectional scores, “teaching evaluation” is the highest; (3)Teacher
Efficacy show affirmative relations to the Teacher Teaching Effectiveness (r=.
72); (4)With the teachers’ awareness of the teacher efficacy, the scores
reveal significant differences on the three sets of low, middle and high in
the overall teacher teaching effectiveness. At the same time, be it in “
overall teacher teaching effectiveness”, the high score sets are apparently
superior to the middle and low sets; (5)Whereof the teacher population
variants and school background variants, highest education and seniority are
rated significant to the differences on awareness of teacher efficacy; (6)
Whereof the teacher population variants and school background variants, only
seniority is rated significant to the differences on awareness of teacher
teaching effectiveness; (7)In examing the various factors of teacher
efficacy, the two factors of “personal teaching efficacy” and “general
teaching efficacy” have the optimal collective projective efficacy on the
teacher teaching effectiveness, particularly of “personal teaching efficacy”.
Recommendations for theoretical and practical implications are presented
in the final report based on the above findings.